Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and our guests in the Visitors Gallery who are survivors of symphysiotomy. I am entirely unqualified to in any way accurately verbalise how the victims of symphysiotomy must feel given the many challenges and difficulties they have had to endure throughout their lives as a result of this procedure. As we sadly often say in these Houses on a variety of issues relating to health as well as other disciplines, there are many reasons for failure but there are no excuses.

The Minister of State's speech is welcome in many respects. The ladies present today, many of whom may were here for the Dáil debate, will note that her speech is almost identical to what the Minister, Deputy Reilly, said in the Dáil some months ago. While it is welcome that various steps were taken in terms of services being made available to the people in question, it does not provide the necessary redress and closure which the Minister mentioned in her speech. I am not a qualified person in this field but I am aware of the pain and trauma, as it was explained to me by women such as those who have taken the time to attend this debate today.

The report mentioned by the Minister has come in for some criticism in terms of the independence of the people preparing it and the suggestion that the terms of reference could potentially compromise its outcome. That is a worry. It is something the Minister must address as quickly as possible. It is certainly a worry that it was commissioned some time ago and appears to have been with the Government since Christmas or shortly afterwards. I appreciate that advice was sought from the Attorney General and so forth as to what the legal implications might be. Governments must consider these things. However, it was then due to be put out for consultation with all the relevant people and concerned stakeholders. One of the briefing notes from one of the groups representing some of the survivors, Survivors of Symphysiotomy, SOS, alleges that it has heard nothing from the Minister at this time. It appears ridiculous in the extreme that a process to consult with all stakeholders would appear to exclude the single most important stakeholders, the people who have been affected by this.

The Minister referred to closure as soon as is possible. What is the hold-up? When will some form of apology be put to the people who should not have undergone this procedure? When will there be suggestions as to what form of redress and compensation can be given? Nothing of monetary value can bring back one's health after so many years of pain and difficulty and the issues that have had to be endured as a result of these procedures, but the one thing we can do is speed up the process. Indeed, I sat where the Government's spokesperson is currently sitting for 70 hours, with just toilet breaks, to ensure the National Asset Management Agency legislation was passed by the Houses. Now we are dealing with an issue that is important to a relatively small number of people. They have spent their lives enduring the pain and trying to get some answers, in the first instance, and trying to secure an apology to which they are entitled and some level of redress.

That is not to take from some of the important services highlighted by the Minister which have finally been made available. However, we appear to be going around in circles. Can the Minister put a final time-frame on when this report will be published so all of us can see it? What is in that we are so afraid to let people know? It is over a year since the report was commissioned and several months since it was made available to the Government. Some of the stakeholders, including the most important stakeholders, have not been consulted about it. Nobody is getting any younger, and the demographic of the people concerned demands that progress be made much more quickly.

I do not wish to delay the House but the single most important issue is closure. Closure as soon as is possible sounds a little like the never-never. When it is necessary these Houses are able to legislate within a matter of hours, not days. Why can we not turn this around more quickly, in the interests of the people who have suffered? Why cannot the Government apply a deadline for itself? It is now mid-May. Can it not pledge to publish this report by 1 June and publish the recommendations it intends to implement within a week or so of that?

Even when I was sitting on the Government side of the House I often criticised these woolly reports and speeches. That is no disrespect to the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, or the Minister, Deputy James Reilly, because I know they did not draft these speeches. However, they say things such as "there were unforeseen circumstances". What does that mean? If somebody is commissioned to produce a report, they must do it. If there were unforeseen circumstances, does that mean people blocked certain information being made available to the person who is preparing a report on behalf of the State? If so, that is a criminal matter. What were the unforeseen circumstances? When will the report be published? When will the recommendations on foot of the report be published? When will the people affected by this ultimately gain some level of redress, to which they are entitled? Indeed, most of them have spent most of their lives waiting for it.